More Articles

The Dispatch E-Edition

All current subscribers have full access to Digital D, which includes the E-Edition and
unlimited premium content on Dispatch.com, BuckeyeXtra.com, BlueJacketsXtra.com and
DispatchPolitics.com.
Subscribe
today!

State regulators investigating Ohio’s electricity market have closed the case without making
major changes to the system.

The Public Utilities Commission of Ohio looked at some hot-button issues in the 15-month probe,
such as whether to get rid of regulated pricing, but the panel’s actions stop short of anything
controversial.

The most visible change for consumers is that the logo of alternative suppliers will soon appear
on the electricity bill.

In Ohio’s system, the utility — such as American Electric Power — delivers electricity and sends
out bills, but consumers can select a supplier for generation service, which is a portion of costs.
The name of the supplier now appears on the bill.

With the change, the supplier’s logo will appear next to the utility’s logo.

On the big issues, the PUCO is recommending further study or taking no action.

For example, the panel is sticking with the current system that says customers will
automatically get the regulated price unless they choose a different plan.

Consumer advocates urged the PUCO to retain the current pricing system, which they said is an
essential protection for customers.

By keeping regulated pricing, the PUCO has “preserved for Ohioans their opportunity to choose
generation service from electric utilities and not just from energy marketers,” said Marty
Berkowitz, spokesman for the Office of the Ohio Consumers’ Counsel, in a statement.

The Retail Energy Supply Association, a trade group for alternative suppliers, said it is
pleased that parts of the ruling “foster competition and enhance the retail marketplace for the
benefit of consumers,” according to a statement from Dwayne Pickett, the group’s Ohio chairman.

In addition to the panel’s 40-page decision, Snitchler submitted an eight-page concurring
opinion that goes into detail about what he sees as unresolved issues.

He questions whether regulated pricing, also called a “standard service offer,” or SSO, is
necessary in a market that offers many choices for consumers.

“Undoubtedly, there will be those who would prefer not to engage in the shopping experience and
prefer to remain with the SSO. On the one hand, as the band Rush might say, if you choose not to
decide you still have made a choice. Such a decision (or nondecision) is the customer’s
prerogative,” he said.

“However, on the other hand, it can also be argued that those nonshopping customers may not be
securing the lowest possible rate and are therefore suffering financial harm.”